Substrate stress relaxation regulates cell spreading

Studies of cellular mechanotransduction have converged upon the idea that cells sense extracellular matrix (ECM) elasticity by gauging resistance to the traction forces they exert on the ECM. However, these studies typically utilize purely elastic materials as substrates, whereas physiological ECMs are viscoelastic, and exhibit stress relaxation, so that cellular traction forces exerted by cells remodel the ECM. Here we investigate the influence of ECM stress relaxation on cell behaviour through computational modelling and cellular experiments. Surprisingly, both our computational model and experiments find that spreading for cells cultured on soft substrates that exhibit stress relaxation is greater than cells spreading on elastic substrates of the same modulus, but similar to that of cells spreading on stiffer elastic substrates. These findings challenge the current view of how cells sense and respond to the ECM.

[1]  D J Mooney,et al.  Alginate hydrogels as synthetic extracellular matrix materials. , 1999, Biomaterials.

[2]  Zhigang Suo,et al.  Stress-relaxation behavior in gels with ionic and covalent crosslinks. , 2010, Journal of applied physics.

[3]  David J Odde,et al.  Traction Dynamics of Filopodia on Compliant Substrates , 2008, Science.

[4]  P. Janmey,et al.  Effects of substrate stiffness on cell morphology, cytoskeletal structure, and adhesion. , 2005, Cell motility and the cytoskeleton.

[5]  Shouren Ge,et al.  Cell adaptation to a physiologically relevant ECM mimic with different viscoelastic properties. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[6]  G. G. Bilodeau,et al.  Regular Pyramid Punch Problem , 1992 .

[7]  D. G. T. Strange,et al.  Extracellular-matrix tethering regulates stem-cell fate. , 2012, Nature materials.

[8]  Joachim P Spatz,et al.  Activation of integrin function by nanopatterned adhesive interfaces. , 2004, Chemphyschem : a European journal of chemical physics and physical chemistry.

[9]  D. Discher,et al.  Optimal matrix rigidity for stress fiber polarization in stem cells. , 2010, Nature physics.

[10]  Eben Alsberg,et al.  FRET measurements of cell-traction forces and nano-scale clustering of adhesion ligands varied by substrate stiffness. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  Cees W J Oomens,et al.  Linear viscoelastic behavior of subcutaneous adipose tissue. , 2008, Biorheology.

[12]  Benjamin L Bangasser,et al.  Determinants of maximal force transmission in a motor-clutch model of cell traction in a compliant microenvironment. , 2013, Biophysical journal.

[13]  D E Ingber,et al.  Cytoskeletal filament assembly and the control of cell spreading and function by extracellular matrix. , 1995, Journal of cell science.

[14]  Paul A. Janmey,et al.  Soft biological materials and their impact on cell function. , 2007, Soft matter.

[15]  M. Sheetz,et al.  Local force and geometry sensing regulate cell functions , 2006, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[16]  Dennis E. Discher,et al.  Nuclear Lamin-A Scales with Tissue Stiffness and Enhances Matrix-Directed Differentiation , 2013, Science.

[17]  Donald E Ingber,et al.  Mechanical control of tissue and organ development , 2010, Development.

[18]  P. Janmey,et al.  Tissue Cells Feel and Respond to the Stiffness of Their Substrate , 2005, Science.

[19]  L G Griffith,et al.  Cell adhesion and motility depend on nanoscale RGD clustering. , 2000, Journal of cell science.

[20]  L. Petzold,et al.  Rheology of reconstituted type I collagen gel in confined compression , 1997 .

[21]  Paul A. Janmey,et al.  Cell-Cycle Control by Physiological Matrix Elasticity and In Vivo Tissue Stiffening , 2009, Current Biology.

[22]  Matthew J. Paszek,et al.  Balancing forces: architectural control of mechanotransduction , 2011, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[23]  Sirio Dupont.  Role of YAP/TAZ in mechanotransduction , 2011 .

[24]  Justin Cooper-White,et al.  The influence of substrate creep on mesenchymal stem cell behaviour and phenotype. , 2011, Biomaterials.

[25]  M. Dembo,et al.  Stresses at the cell-to-substrate interface during locomotion of fibroblasts. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[26]  P. Janmey,et al.  Rheology of Fibrin Clots. VI. Stress Relaxation, Creep, and Differential Dynamic Modulus of Fine Clots in Large Shearing Deformations , 1983 .

[27]  David J. Mooney,et al.  Harnessing Traction-Mediated Manipulation of the Cell-Matrix Interface to Control Stem Cell Fate , 2010, Nature materials.

[28]  Dennis Discher,et al.  Substrate compliance versus ligand density in cell on gel responses. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[29]  Christopher S. Chen,et al.  Mechanotransduction in development: a growing role for contractility , 2009, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[30]  R. Kamm,et al.  Substrate viscosity enhances correlation in epithelial sheet movement. , 2011, Biophysical journal.

[31]  L. Bilston,et al.  On the viscoelastic character of liver tissue: experiments and modelling of the linear behaviour. , 2000, Biorheology.